linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/24] pidns: Remove races by stopping the caching of proc

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 11 Jul 2010 07:25:18 -0700
From:	ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Linux Containers <containers@...ts.osdl.org>,
	Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/24] pidns: Remove races by stopping the caching of proc_mnt

Louis Rilling <Louis.Rilling@...labs.com> writes:

> On 09/07/10  8:58 -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> 
>> Having proc reference the pid_namespace and the pid_namespace
>> reference proc is a serious reference counting problem, which has
>> resulted in both leaks and use after free problems.  Mount already
>> knows how to go from a pid_namespace to a mount of proc, so we don't
>> need to cache the proc mount.
>> 
>> To do this I introduce get_proc_mnt and replace pid_ns->proc_mnt users
>> with it. Additionally I remove pid_ns_(prepare|release)_proc as they
>> are now unneeded.
>> 
>> This is slightly less efficient but it is much easier to avoid the
>> races.  If efficiency winds up being a problem we can revisit our data
>> structures.
>
> IIUC, the difference between this solution and the first one I proposed is that
> instead of pinning proc_mnt with mntget() at copy_process()-time, proc_mnt is
> looked for and, if possible, mntget() at release_task()-time.
>
> Could you elaborate on the trade-off, that is accessing proc_mnt at
> copy_process()-time vs looking up proc_mnt at release_task()-time?

A little code simplicity.  But Serge was right there is cost a noticeable
cost.  About 5%-7% more on lat_proc from lmbench.

The real benefit was simplicity.

Eric
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/